I ain't letting it go

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Buster Light
And maybe I too am missing the point.
WHAT DO YOU SAY?Buster

Buster: The batter-runner failing to go to first is not an infraction.

How about this: R1, 2 out: B1 rolls to short who flips to second for the third out. Does the batter-runner have to run to first?

How about this: R2, R3 (moving on the pitch), 2 out. B1 rolls to short, who tags R2 for the third out AFTER R3 scores. Does the batter-runner have to run to first?

Good Lord, Buster: You've been calling ball in Texas for 30 years. Did you ever call anyone out at first base during live action FOR THE FOURTH FREAKING OUT?

Buster: It's smoke and mirrors, mirros and smoke.

Hey, Bubba: When I've got three out and no baserunning infraction (missed base/left too soon), I don't have to justify anything to a coach.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by JJ
For the record - I'm still on the fence here (it was implied that "once there were three, now there's only one").
I will remain on the fence until an official FED interp/case/clarification is handed down. I respect opinions and documentation that have been presented here by BOTH sides - I just haven't been swayed one way or the other with regard to a FED interp on the play.

ell Illinois FED umpires are worse off than I thought.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by umpyre007
Problem is that Willson overestimates his importance. He makes one measly statement that he WOULD follow PBUC interpretations and then spends countless bandwidth and wordiness on tearing it down. This misleads. He has hashed this SAME issue before on McGriff's and it lead to his mental instability.

So let me get this straight, U7:

You say that I "mislead" simply because I am using this BASEBALL DISCUSSION FORUM to actually DISCUSS an official interpretation in BASEBALL that I believe is inconsistent with the original spirit and intent of the rules of the game, not to mention its history and tradition?

You're kidding, right? IOW, you're putting me down for using this forum in the way that it was intended to be used? Get a grip!!

And where did you get all this crap about "mental instability" from? That's an obscene accusation to make about someone, especially when you have absolutely no qualifications or evidence with which to make it!

IMO you are a complete waste of space and a blight on this forum. The sooner you depart the better off we ALL shall be for your absence. Go back to McGriff's where your sort of nasty tactics and spiteful allegations are considered acceptable behaviour.

Jealousy and Hatred are the right and left hands of Satan...

Have a nice day.

[Edited by Warren Willson on Mar 29th, 2001 at 07:32 PM]

[JJ]

"Illinois umpires are worse off than I thought"???

Why - because I want an "official" FED interp here, or because I won't accept your "authoritative" reasons?

Grow up, Carl.

[rex]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress




Originally, there were three: JJ, rex, and him. Now he's all alone, still attacking Warren and me, still clinging to his pathethic little group name.



I don't think so Carl. I don't ever remember JJ attacking Warren or yourself. And I know I've never attacked me Cobber.We won't go into what I've thought about you.

-------------------------------------------------------------
There is no provision in any rulebook for an umpire to call a fourth out EXCEPT ON APPEAL.


4.09(b) and PENALTY say nothing of an appeal. Case plays yes but the rule no. But the case plays don't address what we've been talking about. Yet the last sentence of the PENALTY would make it the fourth out in our play. There ain't no appeal.

And we all know no run scores if on the LAST out of an inning the B/R is called out before he ____________. (You fill in the blank

------------------------------------------------------------
In Jerry McGuire Cuba Gooding Jr wondered: "Where's the money?" On The Official Forum I'm wondering: "Where's the blame?" What on earth could be amiss with any of the three points I've just made?


No Carl Cuba Gooding Jr said "Show me the Money"
What is amiss with your three points is 4.09(b)

Has any body read the damn rule? It's titled how a team SCORES.

The Fed is looking the same with each new post. But I did enough looking and I'll let you'll be the Jackbulls on that one.


Ps Sorry I forgot to go into WORD--No spell check

rex

[David B]

Originally posted by JJ
"Illinois umpires are worse off than I thought"???

Why - because I want an "official" FED interp here, or because I won't accept your "authoritative" reasons?

Grow up, Carl.

JJ,

It's just that based on past experience, FED is not going to give an "official" interp because the play is pretty basic.

Have you ever had to call a fourth out at first?

Didn't think so.

JMO

Thanks
David

[rex]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by Buster Light
[B]And maybe I too am missing the point.
WHAT DO YOU SAY?


How about this: R1, 2 out: B1 rolls to short who flips to second for the third out. Does the batter-runner have to run to first?


Nope-- There ain't no run in question so no need for a fourth out.
----------------------------------------------------------
How about this: R2, R3 (moving on the pitch), 2 out. B1 rolls to short, who tags R2 for the third out AFTER R3 scores. Does the batter-runner have to run to first?

YUP-- Now-- He does asper PBUC in pro ball.

--------------------------------------------------------

Buster: It's smoke and mirrors, mirros and smoke.

Boy you got that right, but whos smoke and mirrors?

rex

[Carl Childress]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rex
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Originally posted by Buster Light
And maybe I too am missing the point.
WHAT DO YOU SAY?


How about this: R1, 2 out: B1 rolls to short who flips to second for the third out. Does the batter-runner have to run to first?


Nope-- There ain't no run in question so no need for a fourth out.
----------------------------------------------------------
How about this: R2, R3 (moving on the pitch), 2 out. B1 rolls to short, who tags R2 for the third out AFTER R3 scores. Does the batter-runner have to run to first?

YUP-- Now-- He does asper PBUC in pro ball.

--------------------------------------------------------

Buster: It's smoke and mirrors, mirros and smoke.

Boy you got that right, but whos smoke and mirrors?

rex

Rex: I know it's difficult for you since you missed out on the first four pages. But do try to keep up. Buster and I are discussing FED rules. After you get that, go back to sleep. Please!

[Edited by Carl Childress on Mar 29th, 2001 at 07:59 PM]

[Carl Childress]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rex

Originally posted by Carl Childress Originally, there were three: JJ, rex, and him. Now he's all alone, still attacking Warren and me, still clinging to his pathethic little group name. I don't think so Carl. I don't ever remember JJ attacking Warren or yourself. And I know I've never attacked me Cobber.We won't go into what I've thought about you.rex

My wife just lost $10. Boy, is she hot! I bet her $100 to $10 that someone would say I was accusing JJ and rex of attacking me. What I said was: "Now he's all alone, still attacking Warren and me." My wife said, "Papa, nobody's that dumb." I said: "Wanna bet?" She said....

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Carl Childress
My wife just lost $10. Boy, is she hot! I bet her $100 to $10 that someone would say I was accusing JJ and rex of attacking me. What I said was: "Now he's all alone, still attacking Warren and me." My wife said, "Papa, nobody's that dumb." I said: "Wanna bet?" She said....

... at odds of risking $10 to make $100, it was worth the gamble, but I'm not surprised you lost.

Cheers,

Warren

[rex]

Well it is true unlike some I've never been a Sexual intelectual.

If you e-mail me a request I'll tell you what that means. It's an old salesman saying.

So now your wife lost ten bucks cause of me Sorry. I'll send her $10.00 if she'll explain 4.09(b) to you. And another $10.00 if she can get you to listen while she's expaining it.

rex

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by rex
Well it is true unlike some I've never been a Sexual intelectual.

If you e-mail me a request I'll tell you what that means. It's an old salesman saying.

So now your wife lost ten bucks cause of me Sorry. I'll send her $10.00 if she'll explain 4.09(b) to you. And another $10.00 if she can get you to listen while she's expaining it.rex

How about this? I'll let DA MAN explain 4.09(b) to you. (Never mind that we're discussing FED rules.)

Historical Notes: The special scoring situation involving a game-ending play appeared in the 1955 Official Rules. The Penalty for failure to comply was drafted in 1957. The exception concerning the obstruction by fans rushing onto the field was implemented in 1976 following an incident in 1975.

All the Approved Rulings following this rule subsection (4.09) appeared in the 1955 casebook.

Professional Interpretation: The Official Notes and Casebook Rulings following 4.09 offer a variety of play situations which implement important enforcement principles concerning third out and game-ending situations.

When the winning run is forced in, it is important for the umpire to be aware of each runnerÂ’s legal obligation, including the batter-runnerÂ’s.

1. if the winning run is forced in [my emphasis] as the result of a batted ball, all runners including the batter-runner are obligated to touch their next bases. The BR must advance to and touch 1st base, and any other runner forced must advance to and touch his next base. If any such forced runner fails to do so, a force out appeal play is in order; and if it is sustained for the third out, no run shall count since the third out was, in effect, a force out. If this appeal force out is not the third out, the runner shall be declared out but the winning run scores.
2. if the winning run is forced in as the result of an award (e.g. base on balls, hit batsman, catcher interference), the runner from third is required to advance to and touch home an4 the batter-runner is required to advance to and touch first base before the game is over.

The other runners on base are not required to touch their next bases when the winning run is forced in as the result of an award.

The Penalty prohibits the batter-runner or runner from third from entering the dugout thinking the game is automatically over because of the award.

Customs and Usage: Umpires must be alert in all game-ending situations and insure that all runners fulfill their legal baserunning obligations. Do not routinely walk off the field as soon as the runner crosses the plate. Other offensive players have obligations which affect the status of that run. In addition, the umpire should be aware of the positions of the infielders, if all infielders have left the field (fair territory), no subsequent appeal may be made.

Situations: One out...runners on first and second. The batter smashes a line drive down the right field line. The runner from second scores easily...the runner from first is thrown out at the plate for the second out. An appeal is made on the batter-runner who missed first base en route to second. The appeal is upheld...does the run count?
RULING: No run shall score during a play in which the third out is made by the batter-runner before he touches first.

Bases loaded...2 outs...score tied 5-5 in the bottom of the ninth inning. The batter draws “ball 4” and the exuberant runner from third charges home. He touches the plate and exchanges “high fives” with the proud batter. They race off and enter their appreciative dugout. What’s the ruling?
RULING: The batter is the third out for refusing to advance to first. No run scores. (JEA 4:31-32)

Read carefully, now, and then go back to see the synopsis I gave in my earlier post.

Here's an even shorter precÃ*s:

1. The bases must be loaded.
2. The batter must become a batter-runner.
3. If he gets a base hit, every runner must advance to the next base.
4. If lhe is awarded first (catcher's interference, base on balls, hit by pitch, balk), only he and the runner from third are required to advance.
5. The runner from third must be the run that ends the game.

The play under discussed has runners at second and third; hense, there is no force play.

Now, see, if you had trusted me (as my credentials prove you should), you would have already known this material and wouldn't look nearly so bad as that other fellow. It seems his case of "I don't like Carl" clouds his judgment just like yours does.

Now, if you're still unconvinced, take it up with Jim at http://www.umpireacademy.com

[Buster]

Carl, I am not suggesting that I would EVER make the darn call. I am just complaining about the FED rule and how the heck to get around it. The defense made the choice to get the third out at the wrong place.
If you have to run the thing out in OBR and it is not specifically addressed in the rules, then why not in FED? FED is making us apply a penalty without an appeal. I also know this is rulebook lawyer crap. Discussing wierd situations and situations that may never come up is what this and other umpire boards are about. Isn't that the whole point of this discussion? Don't get me wrong, I am not angry, ticked or anything else.

I have read the entire thread and that is what I got out of it when the discussion switched to FED rules. Did I miss something somewhere?

Buster

[Edited by Buster on Mar 29th, 2001 at 09:53 PM]

[Tim C]

I am confused as to how those of you disagree with Carl on this issue still think you have a leg to stand on . . .

I mean, at best, Carl and I are lethal enemies, yet it seems so freakin' basic that his interp of this specifc rule is perfect.

I think some of you just fight becasue you are considering the source.

Hang in there Carl, this time you are 100% nuts-on.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Buster
Carl, I am not suggesting that I would EVER make the darn call. I am just complaining about the FED rule and how the heck to get around it. The defense made the choice to get the third out at the wrong place.
If you have to run the thing out in OBR and it is not specifically addressed in the rules, then why not in FED? FED is making us apply a penalty without an appeal. I also know this is rulebook lawyer crap. Discussing wierd situations and situations that may never come up is what this and other umpire boards are about. Isn't that the whole point of this discussion? Don't get me wrong, I am not angry, ticked or anything else.

I have read the entire thread and that is what I got out of it when the discussion switched to FED rules. Did I miss something somewhere?

Buster

[Edited by Buster on Mar 29th, 2001 at 09:53 PM]

Buster:

Call Herb and ask him what to do. Seriously!

But, to answer your questions:

FED rules now:

1. If the batter-runner does not go to first, that is not a baserunning infraction. Those are of two kinds only: a runner misses a base or a runner leaves too soon. (FED 8-2 Penalty; casebook 9.1.1 Situation E)

2. A batter-runner is not forced to go to first. (FED 2-24-5; 9-1-1a/b)

Note: If the out made by the batter-runner was a force out (meaning he MUST advance to the base because of something inherent in the rules), then the rules would not need to provide specific information about how to treat the batter-runner when he is out at first. The Committee would simply say: "A run doesn't score when the third is a force out," and that would cover the B-R also. Such simply isn't the case anywhere.

Do not be misled by anyone who quotes 8-2-5: The FED means: If a baserunning infraction is the third out, runs scored by the following runner(s) would not count. With two outs [my emphasis], if the base missed was first or the first base to which any runner was forced to advance, no runs would score.

3. The FED inadvertently omitted the definition of a "force play" when they restructured Rule 2 for the 1992 edition. In all books up to 1992, they wrote:

A force play is a play in which a runner (or two or three runners) loses his right to the base he occupies and is forced to advance because the batter becomes a batter-runner. (FED 2-12-4, 1991 edition)

Note: In the front of that book, under rules changes, the Committee listed none for rule two.

Buster: You must see this is a no-brainer.

Finally, you write:

The defense made the choice to get the third out at the wrong place.

Correct, and since they did that during live action, it is not the umpire's duty to protect them. He does that only when a fourth out results from a baserunning error, and, oh, we did that in number 1 above.

Say "Hey" to Herb for me.